Re: [PATCH] mm,memory_hotplug: Drop unneeded locking
From: David Hildenbrand <hidden>
Date: 2021-06-01 08:03:01
Also in:
lkml
On 01.06.21 09:47, Oscar Salvador wrote:
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
On Tue, Jun 01, 2021 at 10:47:31AM +0530, Anshuman Khandual wrote:quoted
Should also just drop zone_span_write[lock|unlock]() helpers as there are no users left ?Yes, definitely. Andrew, can you squash this on top? Thanks:diff --git a/include/linux/memory_hotplug.h b/include/linux/memory_hotplug.h index a7fd2c3ccb77..27d8ba1d32cb 100644 --- a/include/linux/memory_hotplug.h +++ b/include/linux/memory_hotplug.h@@ -67,10 +67,6 @@ struct range mhp_get_pluggable_range(bool need_mapping); /* * Zone resizing functions - * - * Note: any attempt to resize a zone should has pgdat_resize_lock() - * zone_span_writelock() both held. This ensure the size of a zone - * can't be changed while pgdat_resize_lock() held. */ static inline unsigned zone_span_seqbegin(struct zone *zone) {@@ -80,14 +76,6 @@ static inline int zone_span_seqretry(struct zone *zone, unsigned iv) { return read_seqretry(&zone->span_seqlock, iv); } -static inline void zone_span_writelock(struct zone *zone) -{ - write_seqlock(&zone->span_seqlock); -} -static inline void zone_span_writeunlock(struct zone *zone) -{ - write_sequnlock(&zone->span_seqlock); -}
If there is no writer anymore, why do we have to protect readers? -- Thanks, David / dhildenb